Allowed

Manraj Kumar Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 May 2023CR. MISC./21471/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under the Arms Act regarding possession of a country-made pistol, the Patna High Court directed the petitioner's release on furnishing a bail bond and two sureties of Rs. 10,000 each, noting 7 months of custody without prior criminal record.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Birpur.

Manraj Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21471 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2022 Thana- KUNAULI District- Supaul

¶3

======================================================

¶4

MANRAJ KUMAR YADAV S/O LATE VINAYAK @ VINAY YADAV Resident of Village- Dagmara, Ward No.- 06, P.S.- Kaunuli (Dagmara O.P.), District- Supaul (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 17-05-2023 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

The petitioner has preferred this application for

¶13

grant of regular bail in connection with Kunauli (Dagmara OP) P.S. Case no. 108 of 2022 registered under sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, a country-made pistol was recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

¶15

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no incriminating article has been recovered from petitioner’s possession. He has been falsely implicated in the case. He is in custody since 6.10.2022 and has no criminal antecedent.

¶16

Heard learned APP for the State.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21471 of 2023(2) dt.17-05-2023 2/2

¶18

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation in the FIR, the petitioner having remained in custody for 7 months since 6.10.2022, chargesheet having been submitted in the case and the petitioner not having any criminal antecedent, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Kunauli (Dagmara OP) P.S. Case no. 108 of 2022 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Birpur, District Supaul.

¶19

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶20

Spd/-

¶21

U T

Manraj Kumar Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manraj Kumar Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sambhu Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Amresh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjeet Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Vinod Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Jag Raj Singh @ Jug Raj Singh Vs the Union of India

Pintu Sharma @ Pintu Kumar Sharma Vs the State of Bihar